STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. GIRISHBHAI POPATBHAI BHALIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant - State under Sec. 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dtd. 20/2/2006 passed by the learned Special Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 7, Rajkot (herein after referred to as 'the learned Trial Court') in Special (ACB) Case No. 6 of 1994, whereby, the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent from the offences punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (herein after referred to as 'the Act'). The respondent is hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' as he stood in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

(2.) The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:

(3.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgement and order of acquittal, the appellant - state has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the judgement and order of acquittal is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned trial Court ought to have appreciated that the complainant has deposed that the accused had demanded for the illegal gratification of Rs.100.00 as illegal gratification for the75/- and had come to the shop and accepted the same. That the panch witness and the Trap Laying Officer have also supported the case of the prosecution and the Investigating Officer has also corroborated the version of the witnesses. That the learned trial Court has erroneously come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the accused and has wrongly believed that the evidence of the complainant and the panch witness is not corroborated by any evidence and is doubtful. That the learned trial Court has given undue importance to some portion of the deposition of the panch witnesses, wherein they have not supported the case of the prosecution and the Investigating Officer has categorically stated that the tainted currency notes were recovered from the posession of the accused. That the learned trial Court ought to have appreciated that the prosecution has proved the ingredients of the demand, acceptance and recovery and the traces of anthracene powder were found on the currency notes as also the shirt of the accused, and hence the judgement and order of acquittal is contrary to law and evidence on record and is required to be quashed and set aside, and the accused must be found guilty for the said offences.